Raffles Boston (40 Trinity Place) | 426 Stuart Street | Back Bay

[George_Apley]

Mixed-feelings for sure. Definitely better buildings to be replaced than this, but also we can't control what properties go up for sale when.

 

[KriterionBOS]

Raffles is a Singapore-based luxury hotel brand that is part of the Accor Hotel group. If you look at their locations on their website, they are all over Asia, parts of Europe and exotic places like the Maldives and Seychelles. They have no other locations in North America. By planting their N. America flag in Boston, that says a lot about the vibrancy of the Boston hotel market, especially on the high end and the city in general.

https://www.raffles.com/

Thanks for the info. No wonder I hadn't heard of them. Surprised they haven't gone to NYC, LA, DC, Miami before Boston.

 

[whighlander]

Agree with those lamenting the loss of another pre-war structure.

It's great (well ... kinda ... I guess?) that Boston will have a new ultra-expensive glassy hotel. It's very unfortunate we have to lose a history-laden masonry mid-rise for it.

I'd be in favor of a blanket protection for pre-war buildings. Continued development and innovation in our build environment is important, but there are enough parking lots, unused air rights and post-war dreck whose replacement can keep the high-end hoteliers' and future pied-a-terre condo owners' demand met for some time.

For this particular one, I just wish the developers had worked with Simon (the mall owners) to build the Raffles over the Copley Mall...

Itchy -- Blanket Protection is always a mistake

Protection is important -- we can't afford to lose another John Hancock House or a Province House -- so we really need to hang onto anything from before 1800 which is still around as there really is not all that much
But from 1830 or so on -- it should be case by case with a hierarchical scale of how high the bar is based on youth:

1. Stuff from the mid to late 19th C is some of the best in Boston -- so preservation of that is important
2. Early 20th C stuff with good character and importance in the context of the street, etc.
3. Mid 20th C especially post WWII -- not so much
4. Anything that was built after 1960 is very much fair game for the wrecking ball
   1. e.g. things like the O'Neil, the West End Towers, Hurley, City Hall
   2. any shopping plaza
   3. any public housing project not already rebuilt
   4. gasoline stations
   5. one story DD's and such

If you protect everything from before WWII --- you will have protected many 1 story warehouses and equipment garages constructed for a wide variety of easily relocatable uses. For example much of the stretch along Dorchester Ave from Broadway to near Andrew meets that definition

 

[elemenoh]

I've stayed at the Raffles properties in Cambodia and other Asian countries and those tend to be high-end renovations of British Colonial hotels. It will be interesting to see how they style a new-build hotel like this. Raffles is now owned by the Accel Group of France, which also owns the Fairmont Copley Plaza.

 

[HenryAlan]

Thanks for the info. No wonder I hadn't heard of them. Surprised they haven't gone to NYC, LA, DC, Miami before Boston.

I was, too, but we really shouldn't be. Boston is hot right now, maybe hotter than it has ever been. It is a good place for a international brand without a US presence to announce itself. And Raffles will hardly be the first. We've seen this on multiple different business levels, whether an international brand like Primark, or a regional brand trying to make a bigger US footprint like Arclight. Boston is seen as a desirable location, even though many of us who live here suffer a bit of an inferiority complex. Just as an example, my parents just visited from L.A., and I took them on a walking tour of some parts of downtown. At one point, my mom remarked that Boston seemed bigger than Los Angeles. Boston gives off that vibe, whether we realize it or not.

 

[KriterionBOS]

At one point, my mom remarked that Boston seemed bigger than Los Angeles. Boston gives off that vibe, whether we realize it or not.

It really does and I would say its because of the high density of the Boston core. I had mentioned once that Boston "seems bigger" than Philadelphia and that is plausible because the Boston core is much denser than Philly and Greater Philly is only 20% bigger than Greater Boston (6 million vs 5, which is not really a huge difference at all ).

 

[nm88]

I've stayed at the Raffles properties in Cambodia and other Asian countries and those tend to be high-end renovations of British Colonial hotels. It will be interesting to see how they style a new-build hotel like this. Raffles is now owned by the Accel Group of France, which also owns the Fairmont Copley Plaza.

Which makes this a curious choice - destroy the sort of building (arguably) they would normally seek out in other locations. I blame the Saunders for the generic building soon to take its place and wear the company emblem, but why do this? I understand why Boston? That makes sense. But to claim this new design as equal to their brand? I'd be curious to know more...

 

[odurandina]

The real crap show is/was/will be 380 Stewart St.
388' of fermented elk poop, and BB Station moose turds.

 

[nm88]

Hopefully, that won't happen. I understand Hancock has changed its mind.

 

[odurandina]

^^Everyone wants to see BB Station to reach its potential. imo, the office tower
design is along some range of mediocre to crazy when compared to BP's solid
to show-stopper rep around the country. The dull planning (overall) of this,
caused me to turn about 140°--to now hoping it doesn't get started.

Architects must get pissed off at the general public, when we fail to see the
immense thought/ details/ nuances that involves planning projects of the magnitude
required below a ~420' height limit.

Even so, did Boston Properties challenge Pelli Clarke Pelli to come up with
a better office bldg? From the renders, it gives an impression like, lazy/ cheapness.
The office tower is a part of a once-in-a-century opportunity to do something
worthy of Back Bay and the South End.

Other cities are getting spectacular architecture. Is the lack of height stopping this?
Can't this be better instead of too often, pissing off even people reasonably open
to development?

 

[kmp1284]

Which makes this a curious choice - destroy the sort of building (arguably) they would normally seek out in other locations. I blame the Saunders for the generic building soon to take its place and wear the company emblem, but why do this? I understand why Boston? That makes sense. But to claim this new design as equal to their brand? I'd be curious to know more...

I'm all for preservation but this isn't a huge loss. It's not particularly noteworthy architecturally or historically and looking at the other historic hotels in Raffles' portfolio I don't think they'd want anything to do with this.

 

[nm88]

^^Fair enough. Though I maintain "noteworthy" is not the only reason to save a building. (I know you're not saying that.) RAFFLES other properties are mostly, well, architecturally dramatic. Present company is more handsomely understated than dramatic, which is fine with me. It makes it a fine neighbor, even a respectful one. I like streets that reflect time, place and context.

I wonder if the new building will diminish views of one of our city's real masterpieces - Hancock Tower.

 

[tmac9wr]

I'm all for preservation but this isn't a huge loss. It's not particularly noteworthy architecturally or historically and looking at the other historic hotels in Raffles' portfolio I don't think they'd want anything to do with this.

I think it’s also worth noting that while they’ve remodeled historical buildings in other cities, and something similar would vibe well in Boston, this particular location is in the shadow of the Back Bay Station Garage. It’s also in a relatively low foot traffic area, which would be another strike against it. Building a tower will make it much more recognizable, which is probably the more appropriate way to enter the North American market.

 

[nm88]

One last time and I'll stop. Most RAFFLES buildings are iconic. This will not be their equal. This will not be iconic. Tall, yes - and a tower may be what they had in mind. But a bland tower, no matter how tall, is still bland.

Travelers familiar with this revered brand will likely find this rendering a surprise. My guess, a disappointing one.

I continue to worry how we slowly nibble away at the architectural legacy of our city, morsel by morsel, with commonplace designs such as this.

 

[tobyjug]

Always thought that this nice academic Renaissance revival building was very similar to the 20s and 30s buildings that give Rome so much of its character. It’s replacement is very boring...

 

[stick n move]

One last time and I'll stop. Most RAFFLES buildings are iconic. This will not be their equal. This will not be iconic. Tall, yes - and a tower may be what they had in mind. But a bland tower, no matter how tall, is still bland.

Travelers familiar with this revered brand will likely find this rendering a surprise. My guess, a disappointing one.

I continue to worry how we slowly nibble away at the architectural legacy of our city, morsel by morsel, with commonplace designs such as this.

The exterior yea, for the 3 seconds you walk up to the tower, but the interior is going to he nice.

 

[Czervik.Construction]

I think for new properties, Raffles wants sleek lux, like this design, rather than late 19th/early 20th Century Colonial Overlord. St. Regis is doing this, too. They have old stately properties, such as NYC, with the legendary King Cole Bar and they have the sleek modern, such as San Francisco.

 

[elemenoh]

I think for new properties, Raffles wants sleek lux, like this design, rather than late 19th/early 20th Century Colonial Overlord. St. Regis is doing this, too. They have old stately properties, such as NYC, with the legendary King Cole Bar and they have the sleek modern, such as San Francisco.

Sounds very much like what Ritz-Carlton did in Boston when they sold off the Newbury St building after the completion of the Millenium building.

Raffles in the process of rehabbing a colonial resort hotel in Udaipur, India, where they will compete with Oberoi and Taj -- both of those hotels are huge, waterfront, colonial resort properties, so the new Raffles will be much the same.

The shiny new Four Seasons and Ritz-Carlton are the key competitors for Raffles in the Boston market, so it seems to make sense for them to build a shiny new tower here.

 

[kmp1284]

The shiny new Four Seasons and Ritz-Carlton are the key competitors for Raffles in the Boston market, so it seems to make sense for them to build a shiny new tower here.

And the Mandarin and the Four Seasons on Boylston, which I suspect will remain the preferred Four Seasons in Boston in the way that Park Lane has in London and 57th Street has in New York.

One last time and I'll stop. Most RAFFLES buildings are iconic. This will not be their equal. This will not be iconic. Tall, yes - and a tower may be what they had in mind. But a bland tower, no matter how tall, is still bland.

Travelers familiar with this revered brand will likely find this rendering a surprise. My guess, a disappointing one.

Let's not get carried away. Raffles as a chain has only existed since the late 1990s. It's merely one luxury brand within the giant Accor portfolio, much like what Ritz and St. Regis are to Marriott and Waldorf is to Hilton. They have a few amazing historic and iconic properties but at least half of their properties can be described like 40 Trinity as modern mediocrity.

Raffles is such a small and geographically limited chain that unless one only travels to the same few places they cannot be the kind of fussy brand loyalist that you describe.

 

[tobyjug]

Sounds very much like what Ritz-Carlton did in Boston when they sold off the Newbury St building after the completion of the Millenium building.

Raffles in the process of rehabbing a colonial resort hotel in Udaipur, India, where they will compete with Oberoi and Taj -- both of those hotels are huge, waterfront, colonial resort properties, so the new Raffles will be much the same.

The shiny new Four Seasons and Ritz-Carlton are the key competitors for Raffles in the Boston market, so it seems to make sense for them to build a shiny new tower here.

That makes a certain amount of sense. But the rehabs of the older properties are no joke, for example in the Oberoi in Kolkata the interior of the Raj era building is more modern than that of the newish Taj 3 miles away in Alipore.